Thinking in loud voice about Health, conflict and peace.

Let me tell you two opposite stories. The first story is about a couple of friends that are divorcing. You love them both, you want to help, but how? Either you help them to mitigate the pain of the divorce OR you try to help them to reconcile and not to divorce. But it is very difficult to do the two at the same time because the imperatives of one contradicts the imperatives of the other. At the end of the day there is a choice to make, how do you want to help. Choosing both seems impossible. Transfer that in your mind to the humanitarian arena.

The second story. I met the minister of health of a war thorn country. He told me, when you see a health facility you see an opportunity for health service delivery. Me, I see a place for community dialogue and reconciliation, while the patients and families are in the waiting room.

What do I make of all this? Having indicators and commitments about peace with results in humanitarian aid does pose an issue of contradictions that may eventually lead to one choice in detriments of the imperative of the other. But then there is the possibility to design programs to create opportunities for dialogue, opportunities for potential collateral benefits and not results to be accountable for. Those opportunities may be taken or not by the parties, possible small steps towards conflict resolution, they may be taken just at that magic moment just when the conditions are ripe.

Here me, just thinking in loud voice. What do you think?

Sould I have titled this, compassion or self-interest, in geopolitical terms?